Update: Alec Baldwin case dismissed

I go back to my initial statement. One should ALWAYS check a firearm to make sure whether or not it's loaded. This is a situation that could have been very easily avoided.

 

There are enormous amounts of safety protocols on film sets that span all departments (camera, grip and electric, stunts, pyrotechnics, weapons, etc). There are even turnaround times to ensure all crew get enough sleep and food so they aren't taken advantage of. Lots of unions involved here.

To echo others, I can't see how Baldwin was responsible as an 'actor', when there is a specific person hired, the armorer, who is in charge of making sure everything looks real, but is in fact, safe. It's that person's failure if a loaded gun is handed to an actor. An actor isn't trained to 'check the chamber' and such. Not his or her job.

However, as the producer, he is at the top of the food chain and is responsible for the safety of all on set. In this capacity I could see him being charged and more than likely being sued.

 

Agreed

 

You say that like everyone has firearm training. Most actors do not. That's why there is an armorer on set to perform that essential task. That is their job - to provide safety to the actors and crew while maintaining the realism needed to satisfy the director. That person screwed up royally and should be held liable.

 

Well maybe actors should get firearm training if they're going to handle firearms? If for no other reason, they prefer their acting look realistic and people who don't have any training tend to look like fools when they hold a firearm?

 

That process should never be on set, but prepped at another location. Zero live rounds should ever be on a set.

 

Unfortunately, the movie will get finished because the victim's husband is now the producer.
I have as much interest in Baldwin's success as I do rooting for OJ to thrive.

 

Sure but the responsibility for that training ultimately falls on the producer not the actor.

 

Producer who hired inept armorer + total failure of gun protocol on set = charge for involuntary manslaughter.

 

Grey area. It could just as easily be something the Actor's Guild should enforce. "If you are required to handle a firearm on set, you should undergo training to safely handle a firearm."

 

Thought I saw early on that a certain group there liked to do target practice in off hours.
Safety officer often has to a bit of a dick and have firm rules that are supported and maintained

 

I'm sure some do. But I suspect the majority are coached on how to handle it for realism. Do you watch movies? Do you see any major motion pictures where people are making fools out of themselves handling a firearm? Of course you don't. Because there are weapons experts on hand for that very reason. Again, it's not an actor's job to check a weapon. There is a trained armorer on set, by law, specifically hired to do so. In fact, having an actor who is not versed in gun safety opening up guns could lead to even more mishaps.

 

I 100% agree, and said as much in an earlier post.

 

It absolutely is as it would be for everyone else in the process of getting that firearm fired on set! Even if they aren't formally trained, you cannot have anyone handling even a prop completely ignorant of how to safely handle a firearm.

 

Ah yes, let’s focus on what’s really important here, finishing a shitty low budget movie by a has-been actor.

 

No matter how badly you want it to be their responsibility, it's not. It's just now how the protocol works. Argue all you want. Stomp your feet and scream it to the heavens, just not how the chain of command on set is structured. Again, there are trained professionals, whose sole responsibility lies in making sure actors and crew are safe. The armorer is negligent here. The buck stops with him or her. I also think Baldwin is negligent, as a producer, for hiring that person.

You want to say SAG should change the rule and make all actors have firearm training? Cool. No issue there. Not a bad idea in fact if it prevents this kind of thing from happening again. But as of now, like it or not, this is the system in place.

 

Ok, let's take another tact here. I'll render half this discussion moot in saying that Baldwin skipped a training course in firearm safety.

In addition, he broke the first rule of firearm safety training on set by pointing the weapon at another human being.

 

So says "The Blaze". Please. It's slanted nonsense. Want me to start digging up articles to support my claim? I can, but not really all that interested in political tit for tat.

Baldwin was working with the DP to get the desired angle for the shot. How is that supposed to happen without "pointing" the gun towards the camera (and her behind it)? Not to mention, guns are pointed at people all the freaking time in movies. How does that happen if you break that quoted "first rule of firearm safety"? Again, clueless partisan garbage.

What I did find interesting is what George Clooney said. His protocol is that he checks the gun every time and on every take. Doesn't have too, but he does. Baldwin said his protocol was to trust the person that had the job, and it has worked in the past - obviously until this point.

Again, the blame is with the armorer. Did you also know they were shooting off live rounds with the very same gun earlier in the day? This person was both negligent and stupid. And Baldwin deserves blame for hiring this incompetent POS.

This is what Baldwin's attorney said - and what has been my point all along. The chain of command failed. Not his fault as an actor, his fault as a producer.

“Any claim that Alec was reckless is entirely false. He, Halyna, and the rest of the crew relied on the statement by the two professionals responsible for checking the gun that it was a ‘cold gun’—meaning there is no possibility of a discharge, blank or otherwise.… Actors should be able to rely on armorers and prop department professionals, as well as assistant directors, rather than deciding on their own when a gun is safe to use.”